MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Hypoxia‐induced sympathetic long‐term facilitation is mediated by a rightward shift in sympathetic action potential amplitude distribution and baroreflex resetting of action potential clusters

2022· article· en· W4225427000 on OpenAlexafffund
Brooke M. Shafer, Anthony V. Incognito, Tyler D. Vermeulen, Massimo Nardone, André L. Teixeira, Stephen A. Klassen, Philip J. Millar, Glen E. Foster

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience of respiration and sleep
Canadian institutionsBrock UniversityUniversity of GuelphUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia
FundersMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsBaroreflexHypoxia (environmental)FacilitationAction (physics)MedicineDistribution (mathematics)Internal medicineCardiologyNeuroscienceChemistryPhysicsPsychologyHeart rateBlood pressureMathematicsOxygen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Baroreflex resetting permits sympathetic long‐term facilitation (sLTF) following hypoxia. Muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA) bursts are generated by synchronous discharge of varying‐amplitude action potentials (APs), with medium APs under strong baroreflex control. AP discharge strategies and baroreflex control of AP clusters facilitating sLTF is unknown. We hypothesized that recruitment of previously latent, large‐amplitude APs and baroreflex resetting of AP cluster operating points (OPs) would mediate sLTF following acute hypoxia. Methods Eight men (age = 24±3 yrs; BMI = 24±3 kg/m 2 ) were exposed to 20 min isocapnic hypoxia (P ET O 2 : 47±2 mmHg) and 30 min recovery. Blood pressure (BP; photoplethysmography) and MSNA (fibular microneurography) were acquired during baseline, hypoxia, early (first 5‐min) and late recovery (last 5‐min). Multi‐unit MSNA burst frequency (BF) and total activity (TA) were quantified. A continuous wavelet transform with matched mother wavelet was used to extract sympathetic APs. AP frequency, AP amplitude (normalized % of largest baseline AP amplitude), percent APs occurring outside a MSNA burst (% asynchronous APs) and total AP clusters was calculated. The proportion of APs firing in small (1‐3), medium (4‐6) and large (7‐10) normalized cluster sizes was assessed. Baroreflex OP was measured by plotting the intersection point of mean cluster incidence and mean diastolic BP (DBP). Friedman repeated‐measures analysis of variance on ranks was used to determine the effect of condition (baseline, hypoxia, early, late). Data are means ± standard deviation or 95% confidence intervals. Results Hypoxia increased BF (P<0.01), TA (P<0.01), AP frequency (Δ124{‐30, 279} AP/min, P<0.05), AP amplitude (Δ3{1, 5} %, P<0.05) and decreased asynchronous APs (Δ‐10{‐17, ‐4} %, P<0.03). Compared to baseline, BF (P<0.03), TA (P<0.02) and AP amplitude (early: Δ3{0, 5} %, P<0.05; late: Δ4{1, 6} %, P<0.05) was elevated during recovery while asynchronous APs (early: Δ‐9{‐16, ‐3} %, P<0.03; late: Δ‐7{‐14, ‐1} %, P<0.03) were reduced. The total number of AP clusters was increased (P<0.05) with no one condition different compared to baseline (hypoxia: Δ3{‐1, 7} clusters; early and late: Δ3{‐1, 6} clusters, P>0.10). Proportion of APs in small clusters was reduced in hypoxia (hypoxia: 44±18 %, P<0.05), early (46±21 %, P<0.05) and late recovery (44±17 %, P<0.05) compared with baseline (53±20 %) while the proportion of APs in large clusters was increased in early recovery (7±6 %, P<0.05) compared with baseline (5±5 %). Baroreflex OPs were shifted rightward for all AP clusters in recovery (baseline DBP: 63±5; early DBP: 64±5; late DBP: 65±4, mmHg; P<0.05) with no effect on slope (P>0.20). Conclusions Hypoxia‐induced sLTF is mediated by reduced asynchronous AP firing, a proportional shift toward large‐amplitude AP activity, and baroreflex resetting of AP clusters to higher OPs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicNeuroscience of respiration and sleep→French-language works237,207→